A Peer-Reviewed Article Dilemma and Factionalism in the Maoist Politics of Nepal Arjun Bahadur Ayadi Abstract The history of the Communist movement of Nepal has passed almost 70-years since the formation of the Communist Party of Nepal (CPN) in 1949. During this period, the Communist movement of Nepal passes through so many ups and downs, twists and turns, and defeats and victories. It has taken different paths in course of its development. It has experienced series of split and merger, which still continues. The Maoist, a radical faction of the communist movement, led the armed struggle for ten-years between 1996-2006 to seizes political power and establish a “New People’s Democracy”. However, the deadly armed struggle concluded in negotiation after 10-year and Maoists re-entered in the competitive politics. As it entered in the competitive politics, the CPN (Maoist), revised its ideological goal from “New People’s Democracy” to “Democracy in the Twenty First Century”. After these ideological change, it has entered in the vicious circle of split and merger. In this context, this paper aims to understand the relations between political dilemma and fraction taken place in the history of Communist movement of Nepal in general and Maoist politics in particular. On the basis of documentary analyses, this paper argues, the whole Communist movement of Nepal including Maoists politics suffered from ideological dilemma (between liberal and radical line) that resulted internal contradiction within the movement leading toward the series of split and generated the serious crisis to radical politics in Nepal. Keywords: CPN (Maoist), Maoism, Marxism, Leninism, ideology Introduction … it will appear that sometimes we are going to the Left and - 1 - Journal of Political Science, Volume XVIII, 2018 sometimes to the Right. In the course of revolution, if one goes Left, then they are Leftists. If they swerve to the Right, then they will be Rightists. We are walking on both legs. Sometimes the left foot leads, sometimes the right foot is forward. It is only by walking on both our feet that we accomplished the ten years of struggle. (Prachanda, 2006, p. 20) The Maoists were moving to the Right. If there is need, we will once again move to the Left. This is the revolutionary strategy. (Ibid, p. 19) We are not dogmatic communist and we are prepared to change and debate our belief with anybody. (Washington Post, 22 November 2006) Karl Marx and Frederick Engels originally propounded the modern concept of the communism in 1840s. However, it failed to pick up any serious resistance in advanced capitalist countries of Europe. Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, better known by nom de plume Vladimir Lenin, founder of the Russian Communist Party (RCP) and leader of the Bolshevik Revolution (BR) (1917), gave a new twist on the idea of communism by reinterpreting it in accordance with the realities of pre-capitalist Russia. Over the next few years of the BR, Mao Tse-tung, Chinese Communists leader, architect of Chinese Cultural Revolution (CR), and the Asian interpreter of Marxism, redefined the Marxist-Leninist (ML) doctrine in the context of the Asian agrarian societies with a touch of nationalistic sentiment, anti-colonial, and anti- imperialist rhetoric which have still strong appeal in several Asian countries. His idea on Marxism, military strategies, and political policies are collectively known as Maoism. With the end of World War-II (WW-II), the wave of decolonization or independence movement had taken place all over the world. Dilemma and... Arjun Bahadur Ayadi - 2 - In this context, in the next door of Nepal, the Cultural Revolution under the leadership of Mao in China and decolonization or independence movement under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi in India got success respectively. Many Nepalese political leaders living in India joined the Indian independence struggle against the British Raj. The reason behind the support of Nepalese political leaders was that it would be helpful to trigger the collapse of authoritarian Rana rule in Nepal if the colonial rule in India ended. Nevertheless, Rana had enjoyed special privileges of British regime. Inspiring from Indian independence movement, the Nepali Congress (NC) party, with principl of liberal democracy, was initially formed in India with the objective of overthrowing the Rana regime in Nepal. Puspa Lal Shrestha, who was affiliated to Nepali Congress in the beginning of his political career, formed the Communist Party of Nepal (CPN) in Calcutta (India) on 22 April 19491. This establishment of the Communist Party of Nepal had formally introduced the idea of communism or Marxism in the political history of Nepal. Meanwhile, the above cited statements2 made by Puspa Kamal Dahal, better known by nom de plume Prachanda, Chairman of the CPN (Maoist), confirmed that the communist movement of Nepal in general and Maoist politics in specific has no consistency and it is being passed through various confusions between Marxist philosophy and liberal democratic framework. Due to the ideological and pragmatic inconsistency, 1 The date of establishment of the CPN has no uniformity, some claimed that CPN was established on 22 April 1949 (when its founder members were agreed to establish CPN) and other argued CPN was established on 15 September 1949 (the date when the CPN made public its first Manifesto). See Bhim Rawal, Nepalma Samyawadi Andolan: Udhbav Ra Bikash (The Communist Movement in Nepal: Origin and Development) (Kathmandu: Saman Prakasan, 1988). 2 Among the three statements, first two statements were made immediately after the 12-Point Understanding agreed between the then CPN (Maoist) and the Seven Party Alliance (SAP) in 2005 and third one was made after signing the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) 2006. - 3 - Journal of Political Science, Volume XVIII, 2018 the communist movement of Nepal has not only become fragile but also supposed to reach the point of liquidation. In this context, this paper has attempted to explain how the communist movement of Nepal in general and Maoist politics in particular suffered from the political dilemma and fraction. For the purpose, the paper is divided into three sections. First, it briefly draws a picture of how the political dilemma and fractions in the communist movement of Nepal led to the origin of the CPN (Maoist). The second section examines the ups and downs of a decade long Maoist armed struggle that caused political dilemma and fractions within the Maoists themselves. Finally, the paper tries to narrate the political dilemma and fraction in the Maoist after its entry into the competitive electoral politics. Methodological Aspects This article is the outcome of five years' long rigorous study of the communist movement of Nepal in general and Maoist politics in specific in between 2013-2018. To fulfill the objectives of the study various sources of information have been collected and consulted during the study period. Primary information has been collected from the documentary sources, such as party documents. The formal and informal talk with different people involved in communist movement of Nepal, either as a leader, cadre, or analyst also become helpful. Along with the primary sources of information, to address the theoretical aspects and historical information about the subject matter, different books, journals, newspapers, and other secondary sources of information are also used in this peace of writing. Although the piece of writing is the combination of documentary and empirical information, it has primarily relied on the method of documentary analyses. Dilemma and... Arjun Bahadur Ayadi - 4 - Maoist Movement as an Outcome of Dilemma within Communist Movement of Nepal The communist movement of Nepal is the outcome of inspiration of the Indian communist rooted in the independence movement of India. Political activists who were disappointed with NC leadership led the formation of communist party of Nepal. During the inaugural session of the party, CPN stated that, “Nepal should establish a ‘new democracy’ as in China, if necessary through armed struggle so as to create a People’s Republic” (CPN, 1949). CPN initially declared itself as the true representative of the proletariat class of Nepal and it expanded the support base throughout the country within a short period of time. Because of the wider support base, immediately after the end of Rana regime in Nepal peasant movement spread against proprietor in rural parts of Nepal. But, because of the ideological confusion and dilemma of leadership, the CPN was unable to lead the movement. Differences within the leadership of CPN regarding the future strategy of the party came into the surface during the second congress of CPN held in 1957. Disagreements aroused over the issues of Constituent Assembly (CA) and parliamentary democracy proposed by Puspa Lal Shrestha, republican system by Sambhu Nath Shrestha, and constitutional monarchical system by Keshar Jung Rajamajhi (Rawal, 1991, p. 51). These differences and disagreements had affected all the structures and units of the party. The units and structures were divided according to the loyalty towards the particular leaders and began to act independently. This phenomenon led to a further crisis in the communist movement of Nepal. The CPN criticized the 1950’s political change as having no political significance since it was not a total revolution - 5 - Journal of Political Science, Volume XVIII, 2018 (Adhikari, 1951). But it decided to join the democratic process and participated in the election for parliament in 1959. The CPN won four constituencies out of 109 in the parliamentary election. In 1960, King Mahendra seized the power and directly ruled the country introducing party-less Panchyat system. During the Darbhanga Plenum of CPN, the clear division of leadership was seen. Leaders were divided in for and against the King’s political takeover. The faction led by Keshar Jung Rayamajhi had supported the king’s move by advocating the idea of constitutional monarchy.